Sentences with phrase «conscience of the community»

Descriptions that once defined the church's mission — being the conscience of the community, helping those in need or being a center for civic or social life — are no longer fully adequate.

Quite simply, volunteers and rescuers are the eyes, ears, and conscience of the community, and they therefore present a danger to the leadership and staff at poorly, ineptly, or cruelly run shelters.

Further, if juries act as the conscience of the community, it is wrong to have juries that so obviously — as in the Stanley case — do not represent the demographics of their community (In 2011, 18 % of Saskatchewan's population was Indigenous).

Third, and most concerning to me, is where you state, «if juries act as the conscience of the community, it is wrong to have juries that so obviously — as in the Stanley case — do not represent the demographics of their community ``.

I think it's important also to look at the comments of the Court in Krieger, where they also say a jury is a bulwark against oppressive laws and the conscience of the community.

More directly, your statement claim that they can not represent the conscience of the community if they are not demographically representative.

Whether it is done for good or bad reasons who is to say but there seems no requirement to act as the conscience of the community, as you hint at.

But the power jurors enjoy, their role as the conscience of the community and as a bulwark against the enforcement of oppressive laws, means that their duties can not be expressed purely in adjudicative terms.

They are the «conscience of the community» and the «bulwark against oppressive laws or their enforcement» (R v Sherratt [1991] 1 SCR 509).

Yet the Supreme Court has explicitly recognized that jurors have the power to refuse to apply the law, are the conscience of their community, and serve as a bulwark against oppressive laws and their enforcement.

However, in exceptional cases, when acting as the conscience of the community and as a bulwark against oppressive laws and their enforcement, jurors may properly refuse to apply the law as written.

One can speculate about the role of racial bias and stereotypes in the jury's reasoning, and whether it simply refused to apply the law, preferring instead the position that killing is justified when people come on your property and make you afraid — i.e., that they refused to apply the law not as the conscience of their community, but because they disagreed with applying it here.

But since it exists and is more than simply a possible wrong a jury could commit, then we have to think seriously about whether we do enough to ensure it's exercised only when it ought to be — i.e., as a bulwark against oppressive laws and the conscience of the community.

Jurors bring many qualities that make them truly representative of the conscience of the community to the decision - making process: gender, ethnic, political, and philosophical diversity; a fresh perspective; collective wisdom; and a breadth of attitudes and experiences.

Jurors can not serve as the conscience of the community when they do not know what punishments they are authorizing (except in capital cases, where jurors must at least find the defendant death - eligible).

They are the «conscience of the community» and the «bulwark against oppressive laws or their enforcement» (R v Sherratt, [1991] 1 SCR 509, 1991 CanLII 86 (SCC)-RRB-.

The Defendant, on appeal, argued that the trial judge made a palpable and overriding error in failing to find that sharing the nude photographs within an intimate relationship would shock the conscience of the community.

I would agree with St. Augustine that an unjust law is no law at all... One who breaks an unjust law must do it openly, lovingly... I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and willingly accepts the penalty by staying in jail to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the very highest respect for law.»

The collective wisdom and experience brought to bear by a jury, acting as the «conscience of the community» allows them to serve as representatives of the public in dispensing justice.

It is impaneled to act as an «arm of the court,» as authorized by the State Constitution, to be a voice of the people and conscience of the community.